How About a Little Silence?
by
Gail Jarvis
by
Gail Jarvis
One
of my New Year’s resolutions might be to stop reading newspaper
articles. I canceled my newspaper subscription some time ago because
of the political agendas it promoted with its coverage, as well
as the columnists it featured. That greatly improved my mental and
physical health. However, I still come across newspaper articles
at coffee shops, the library and the Internet. And it is becoming
increasingly difficult for me to control my emotions when I read
about the absurd foolishness taking place in our country.
Even
more aggravating is the fact that if I decide to write a letter
to the editor with an opposing point of view, it is rarely printed.
If it is, the editors usually sanitize what I have written by editing
to the point of censorship. This raises my ire even further.
For
example, as I recently read an article in the Savannah Morning
News, I found myself grinding my teeth. The article concerned
one of Governor Perdue’s "racial reconciliation" meetings
being held throughout the state of Georgia. At this particular meeting,
the Governor was joined on stage by five panelists: three African
Americans, one Hispanic and one Vietnamese.
What
first set my pulse racing was this comment by one of the panelists:
"Racism does exist. It is something that we do not talk about."
Do not talk about?? Racism is practically the only thing
we talk about. I can’t recall a single day without a reference to
some form of racism in the media. I have seen articles about racism
in housing; schools and colleges, government agencies, business
organizations, sports, entertainment, the healthcare system, the
justice system, lending practices and so on.
Over
the years the definition of racism has become so flexible that it
now means anything a member of a grievance group says it means.
As an illustration, consider these two examples of racism voiced
by members of the audience at the racial reconciliation meeting:
1. The disproportionate ratio of black prisoners to white ones in
the state’s penal system; and 2. The bad treatment of Muslims in
Georgia.
Each
of these examples is based on a pre-conceived supposition; i.e.,
the justice system in Georgia is prejudiced against minorities,
and Muslims are subjected to discrimination and harassment throughout
the state. Whether or not these suppositions are true is beside
the point. If members of minority groups claim they are true, that
ends the discussion.
To
those of us old enough to remember the initial goals of the civil
rights movement (to end segregation and remove legal impediments
to minority advancement) the concerns voiced at the recent racial
reconciliation meeting are amazing. Can you imagine what the reaction
would have been if these demands had been part of the original goals
of the civil rights movement?
Civil
rights activists have wisely targeted one goal at a time, even though
they know they have Congress under their thumbs. After each goal
was substantially achieved, a new goal was established, and, as
I stated, racism was redefined to include opposition to the new
goal. And a gullible and guilt-obsessed public meekly accepted each
new definition.
I
can’t recall any Lowcountry newspaper raising a single objection
to any claim of racism no matter how far-fetched. Furthermore, even
though it is an insult to blacks, area newspaper editors assume
that all blacks think alike. You will search in vain for columns
by black journalists such as Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and
Larry Elder. And I would doubt that local journalists ever consult
the website of that astute black lady, Elizabeth Wright Issues
& Views.
Obviously,
we know that the ultimate result of these racial reconciliation
meetings will be a demand for more government regulations at the
state level. That is a given. But we have already had 50 years of
government mandated racial preferences. And most Americans would
agree that the government’s role in racial reconciliation long ago
passed its "sell by" date. Any future improvement in race
relations will have to be made by individuals themselves.
So,
in my opinion, Governor Perdue has made a serious misjudgment by
holding these sessions. Like many others, Governor Perdue possesses
the naïveté to think that talking about problems alleviates them.
Sometimes it does, but it can also exacerbate them. I maintain that
these meetings will aggravate race relations. I make that claim
because the advertised agenda of the meetings primarily attracts
those who already have an inflated sense of injustice. And I know
from personal experience with meetings like this that difference
of opinion is not only frowned on but often shouted down.
Quite
frankly, our racial dilemma has now reached the point where, as
the old saying goes, the best way to solve the problem is to lose
interest in it.
December
30, 2003
Gail
Jarvis [send
him mail], a CPA living in
Beaufort, SC, is an advocate of the voluntary union of states established
by the founders.
Copyright
© 2003 LewRockwell.com
Gail
Jarvis Archives
|